TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOLLOWER

Chapter 1: Introduction1.1BackgroundOrganisational citizenship behaviour is a widely researched topic given its direct linkto increased unit work performance, job satisfaction, reduced absenteeism, loyalty, reducedintensions to leave as well as increased customer satisfaction and loyalty (Dalal, 2005; Organ,Podsakoff, & MacKenzie, 2005; P. M. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Bommer, 1996; P. M.Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990).It encapsulates discretional positivebehaviours that are directed towards other employees as well as those that directed towards theorganisation (Williams & Anderson, 1991). Organisational citizenship behaviours (OCBs) arethose behaviours undertaken by an employee that go above and beyond their prescribedemployment contract (Organ, 1997). They include behaviours that both benefit the organisationspecifically (OCBOs) and those that benefit other individual employees (OCBIs) (Williams &Anderson, 1991).One important antecedent to OCBs identified in research is leadership (N. P. Podsakoffet al., 2017). Leaders influence job satisfaction, productivity, and organisational commitment(McNeese-Smith, 1996), organisational effectiveness (Yukl, 2008) and performance (PirolaMerlo, Härtel, Mann, & Hirst, 2002).In particular, studies on leadership behaviour haveshown that effective leaders influence OCBs, in particular, Transformational Leadership (TL)behaviour (Cho & Dansereau, 2010; Kent & Chelladurai, 2001; Kim, 2014; López-Domínguez,Enache, Sallan, & Simo, 2013; P. M. Podsakoff et al., 1996). Indeed, TL has been highlightedas a particularly effective leadership style in an environment where organisations are constantlyadapting and changing to be sustainable in today’s highly competitive, progressive and evolvingbusiness environment (Todnem By, 2005). TL is often associated with positive organisationalchange (Eisenbach, Watson, & Pillai, 1999; López-Domínguez et al., 2013), and therefore itsrelevance to organisations, now more than ever is particularly important as a driver of positiveOCBs that can improve organisational performance (N. P. Podsakoff et al., 2017).Whilst there are various attempts at defining TL, there are four common elements asdefined by Bass (1991): idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individualisedChapter 1: Introduction1

consideration and intellectual stimulation. At its broadest level, TL involves motivatingemployees to internalise the leader’s vision, thereby performing above what may be expectedbased on a purely transactional leader relationship (Guay & Choi, 2015). Individualisedconsideration refers to genuine concern for the follower, intellectual stimulation encouragesfollower creativity and idealised influence and inspirational motivation together are oftenreferred to as charismatic leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1990). Previous studies have postulateda positive relationship between TL and increased OCBs (Wang et al., 2011).The direct effect of elements of TL on OCBs has been suggested in literaturepreviously, however, there is evidence that the direct effects are not always found whichsuggests the presence of moderating variables. One particular variable that has piqued interestof researchers is personality. Indeed, as TL generates positive organisational outcomes,numerous studies have been undertaken to ascertain the personality traits of transformationalleaders (Judge & Bono, 2000; Phipps & Prieto, 2011), however, there are few studies thatidentify the importance of follower personality traits (Felfe & Schyns, 2010; Guay & Choi,2015; Naber & Moffett III, 2017) and even less that assess the followers perception of TL. Thewidely used and accepted method of TL measurement is the Multi-Factor Leadership scale(MLQ). It is specifically designed to measure manager’s self-rated levels of transactional andTL (B. M. Bass & B. J. Avolio, 1992) but not the follower’s perception of said leadership.Currently, there are limited studies that attempt to ascertain the follower’s perception of TL orthe moderating impact of follower personality, specifically the five-factor personality model(Guay & Choi, 2015).The present study investigated the effect of follower personality on the TL-OCBrelationship, in particular whether follower personality moderates the relationship between TLand OCBs. To explore this research question, the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personalityproposed by Donnellan et al. (2006) was used. The FFM posits five broad personality factors:openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism(Barrick & Mount, 1991; Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; Digman, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1989).The FFM was chosen to measure follower personality as it is a widely used scale and has provenpreviously to be an accurate measurement tool that is generally culturally robust (Donnellan etal., 2006).2Chapter 1: Introduction

The first factor, openness to experience also referred to as intellect (Donnellan et al.,2006; Goldberg, 1990) refers to intellectual curiosity, imagination, adventure, being broadminded and artistically sensitive (Digman, 1990; Furnham, 1996; McCrae & Costa, 1989).People who score high in openness are more likely to engage in risky behaviour (McCrae,Zonderman, Costa Jr, Bond, & Paunonen, 1996). The second factor, conscientiousness reflectsdependability, responsibility and good organisational skills (Barrick & Mount, 1991).Conscientious individuals are hardworking, plan ahead achievement-orientated and perseverewhen faced with challenges. (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; Digman, 1990;McCrae & Costa, 1989). The third factor, extraversion is when the individual displays traitssuch as being sociable, talkative, expressive, gregarious as well as assertive (Barrick & Mount,1991; Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; Donnellan et al., 2006; Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann Jr, 2003).The forth factor, agreeableness suggests individual behaviours associated with likeability,conformity and compliance. (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992). Individualswho score high in agreeableness are more likely to be good-natured and cooperative (Barrick& Mount, 1991). The fifth factor, neuroticism refers to individual’s emotional stability (Barrick& Mount, 1991; Donnellan et al., 2006; Gosling et al., 2003). Individuals who experience highneuroticism are often worried, insecure, depressed, emotional and anxious (Barrick & Mount,1991).Some studies have found consciousness and agreeableness to predicts favourablelevels of OCBs (Chiaburu, Oh, Berry, Li, & Gardner, 2011; Ilies, Fulmer, Spitzmuller, &Johnson, 2009; Organ & Ryan, 1995), however, few have researched the moderating impact offollower personality on the leadership/OCB relationship. More recently, Guay and Choi (2015)explored TL and OCBs and the moderating impact of neuroticism and introversion. They foundthat followers with high levels of neuroticism, positively moderated the relationships betweenTL and OCBs. They also found that low follower extraversion also moderated the TL and OCBrelationships such that introverted followers displayed higher levels of OCBs when theyperceived high levels of TL (Guay & Choi, 2015). This is particularly interesting as itcontradicts Felfe and Schyns (2010) studies that state the more similar the follower is to the TL,the more likely they are to exhibit higher levels of OCBs. Transformational Leaders aresynonymous with having low levels of neuroticism and very high levels of extraversion (Judge& Bono, 2000). Guay and Choi’s (2015) findings are particularly interesting as they suggestthat follower personality, specifically the FFM may have a larger and more complex role toplay in this relationship rather than follower similarity with the leader.Chapter 1: Introduction3

1.2Research ContextThis study has used quantitative data to investigate the research hypotheses. Preexisting scales that have been previously validated were used to re-affirm existing theories andbuild on the current framework of knowledge. The sample was anonymously drawn from theAmazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTURK) platform which allows companies and individuals tosurvey participants for a small fee to obtain results from employees from multiple organisationswith varied positions so as to elicit a broad spectrum of data. Leaders were not be asked to selfrate their leadership style given leadership behaviours are not direct reflections of reality butinstead a reality filtered through the lens of the follower (Naber & Moffett III, 2017). Althoughthe perceptions of leader behaviour are not direct reflections but instead a perceptual processby the subordinate that may result in the halo effect or horn effect (Calder, 1977; Lord & Maher,2002; Naber & Moffett III, 2017), the purpose was to further understand follower outcomesspecifically. Therefore, the MLQ, which is traditionally a self-rated TL scale, was altered toallow the follower to observe and rate their leader behaviour.The follower was also be asked to self-rate their own organisational citizenshipbehaviours. This is because leaders are not privy to all aspects of OCBI and OCBO andtherefore may not divulge accurate information (P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y. Lee,& N. P. Podsakoff, 2003). Whilst, there is an argument that self-rater bias may affect the resultsof OCBs (Podsakoff et al., 2003), the method in which the data is being collected, i.e.completely anonymously and not in relation to a pro-active initiative by the organisation, theCEO or the head of human resources means there is less likelihood of the respondent answeringquestions in a way that may be perceived as favourable to their organisation.4Chapter 1: Introduction

1.3Contribution to TheoryAlthough leadership and OCBs have been extensively researched, N. P. Podsakoff,Morrison, and Martinez (2018) found that due to augmentation of pre-existing scales as well asreinterpretations of both leadership and OCB theories, many studies were either not replicable,contradicting in their findings or had not been replicated enough to be regarded as significant.Those that used same or similar measurement scales and were in agreement were very limited(one or two studies) therefore their recommendation was to replicate prior studies to cement theexisting theory (N. P. Podsakoff et al., 2018; N. P. Podsakoff et al., 2017). This study’s purposewas to strengthen the theory that TL is positively related to OCBs and add to the literatureshowing the moderating impact of follower personality traits (Felfe & Schyns, 2010; Guay &Choi, 2015).1.4Contribution to PracticeFirstly, TL has been linked to employee empowerment and the reduction of intensionsto quit (McKay et al., 2007). Additionally, low levels of employee OCBs are directly linked toturnover intensions and actual turnover (Chen, Hui, & Sego, 1998). Employee turnover iscostly.Fitz-enz (1997) found the real cost to replace ten professional employees wasapproximately 1 million due to the significant amount of resources needed to interview, recruitand train employees (Griffith & Hom, 2001; Mobley 1982), obviously today that cost will besignificantly higher. High employee turnover also contributes to the loss of organisationalmemory and decreased productivity (Huber, 1991 & Johnson, 1995). In organisations thatexperience a mass exodus of employees, the remaining employees experience significant lowermorale (Rainey, 2003) which subsequently contributes to lower OCBs.Secondly, employees with high levels of OCBs are more likely to participate indiscretionary behaviours that will benefit the organisation (Williams & Anderson, 1991). Notonly do high levels of employee OCBs lead to a happier, more productive workforce (Organ,1988), evidence suggests that this is also related to organisational competitive and comparativeadvantage (Pirola-Merlo, Härtel, Mann, & Hirst, 2002). Given the increasing emulous globalenvironment, it is imperative that organisations not only constantly evolve but harness theChapter 1: Introduction5

optimal potential of their human resources.This research may help organisations inrecruitment, restructuring and understanding their current inefficiencies or efficiencies as thecase may be.1.5Research Problem and Research QuestionsThe study aimed to better understand the moderating effect of follower personality onthe positive TL and OCB relationship. As high levels of OCB lead to reduced turnover,increased staff morale and higher productivity (Organ et al., 2005), and TL also has been shownto improve productivity and increase follower OCBs (Bottomley, Mostafa, Gould-Williams, &León-Cázares, 2016) it is important understand how follower personality impacts thisrelationship (Boerner, Eisenbeiss, & Griesser, 2007; Hsi, 2017). Given the previous studies onfollower personality and Transformational Leadership (Felfe & Schyns, 2006, 2010; Guay &Choi, 2015; Judge & Bono, 2000; H. Wang, Law, Hackett, Wang, & Chen, 2005), it is expectedthat follower personality will moderate the positive relationship between TL and OCBs (Guay& Choi, 2015; H. Wang et al., 2005).The purpose of this study was to use follower rated measurements of leadership, as well as,self-rated personality scales and self-rated measures of OCBs to better understand themoderating impact of personality on TL and OCB and how personality effects this relationship.Whilst Guay and Choi’s (2015) work did establish that personality, specifically neuroticismand introversion, does moderate the relationship between TL and OCBs, in their study, leaderswere asked self-rate their followers using Lee & Allen’s (2002) OCB 16-item measure withtwo latent variables being OCBI and OCBO. This current study was specifically aimed atfollower perspectives therefore follower rated scales and existing scales were modified andwere deliberately used with a view to better understand the impact of this constructs throughthe lens of the employee. As such, the research questions were as follows:Research question 1. Is TL (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individualconsideration, intellectual stimulation) positively related to follower OCBI andfollower OCBO?6Chapter 1: Introduction

Research question 2. Does follower extraversion moderate the relationship betweenTL (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, intellectualstimulation) and follower OCB (OCBI & OCBO) such that the relationship is strongerwhen follower extraversion is lower?Research question 3. Does follower conscientiousness moderate the relationshipbetween Charisma (idealised influence, inspirational motivation) and follower OCB(OCBI & OCBO) such that the relationship will be stronger when followerconscientiousness is higher?Research question 4. Does follower neuroticism moderate the relationship betweenTL (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, intellectualstimulation) and follower OCB (OCBI & OCBO) such the relationship is strongerwhen follower neuroticism is higher?Research question 5. Does follower agreeableness moderate the relationship betweenTL (idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, intellectualstimulation) and follower OCBI (OCBI & OCBO) such that the relationship will bestronger when follower agreeableness is higher and weaker when agreeableness islower?Research question 6. Does follower openness moderate the relationship between TL(idealised influence, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, intellectualstimulation) and follower OCBI (OCBI & OCBO) such that the relationship will bestronger when follower openness is higher and weaker when openness is lower?Chapter 1: Introduction7

1.6Structure of Thesis by ChapterThis thesis is organised into five chapters. Chapter one explains the background,context and purpose of the research undertaken. Chapter two discusses the theories usedidentifying the relevant literature beginning with the discussion of the inception and evolutionof each construct; Organisational Citizenship Behaviours, Transformational Leadership, andthe Five Factor Personality Model. The literature review for each factor explains both therationale behind the use of each concept, synthesises the relevant literature and provides thefoundation for discussion.Chapter three is the research design which explains themethodology

MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire for Transformational Leadership as per Bass and Avolio (1992) MLQ5X Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire for Transformational Leadership short form adapted from Bass and Avolio (1997) NEO-IPIP A measu